158
F. Li et al. / Journal of Controlled Release 143 (2010) 151–158
[6] G.D. Leonard, T. Fojo, S.E. Bates, The role of ABC transporters in clinical practice,
Oncologist 8 (5) (2003) 411–424.
(Fig. 7). The increase in cell population in sub-G1 phase indicated the
induction of cell apoptosis by SMART-100 [23,24]. An increase in
caspase 3 activity is an important marker for cell apoptosis. Treatment
with SMART-100 increased caspase 3 activities in this study (Fig. 8),
which indicated the occurrence of apoptosis. From the binding of
microtubule destabilizer with the tubulin to apoptosis is a compli-
cated intracellular process, which involves multiple signal pathways,
including the checkpoint of mitotic spindle assembly, the activation of
cyclin-dependent kinases, and the JNK/SAPK [25]. However, these
signal pathways are beyond the scope of this study.
[7] P. Seve, C. Dumontet, Is class III beta-tubulin a predictive factor in patients
receiving tubulin-binding agents? Lancet Oncol. 9 (2) (2008) 168–175.
[8] Z.S. Chen, E. Hopper-Borge, M.G. Belinsky, I. Shchaveleva, E. Kotova, G.D. Kruh,
Characterization of the transport properties of human multidrug resistance
protein 7 (MRP7, ABCC10), Mol. Pharmacol. 63 (2) (2003) 351–358.
[9] A.L. Risinger, E.M. Jackson, L.A. Polin, G.L. Helms, D.A. LeBoeuf, P.A. Joe, E. Hopper-
Borge, R.F. Luduena, G.D. Kruh, S.L. Mooberry, The taccalonolides: microtubule
stabilizers that circumvent clinically relevant taxane resistance mechanisms,
Cancer Res. 68 (21) (2008) 8881–8888.
[10] W. Gradishar, Management of advanced breast cancer with the epothilone B
analog, ixabepilone, Drug Des. Devel. Ther. 3 (2009) 163–171.
[11] Y. Lu, C.M. Li, Z. Wang, C.R. Ross 2nd, J. Chen, J.T. Dalton, W. Li, D.D. Miller,
Discovery of 4-substituted methoxybenzoyl-aryl-thiazole as novel anticancer
agents: synthesis, biological evaluation, and structure–activity relationships, J.
Med. Chem. 52 (6) (2009) 1701–1711.
[12] K.L. Hennenfent, R. Govindan, Novel formulations of taxanes: a review. Old wine
in a new bottle? Ann. Oncol. 17 (5) (2006) 735–749.
[13] G. Gaucher, R.H. Marchessault, J.C. Leroux, Polyester-based micelles and
nanoparticles for the parenteral delivery of taxanes, J. Control Release (in
press), doi:10.1016/j.jconrel.2009.11.012.
[14] M. Danquah, F. Li, C.B. Duke 3rd, D.D. Miller, R.I. Mahato, Micellar delivery of
bicalutamide and embelin for treating prostate cancer, Pharm. Res. 26 (9) (2009)
2081–2092.
[15] H. Maeda, G.Y. Bharate, J. Daruwalla, Polymeric drugs for efficient tumor-targeted
drug delivery based on EPR-effect, Eur. J. Pharm. Biopharm. 71 (3) (2009)
409–419.
PEG-PLA micelles have been successfully used as a Cremophor EL-
free formulation for paclitaxel (Genexol-PM), which is under
multicenter phase II clinical trial [26]. Because of its superior
performance as a delivery system for paclitaxel, we used PEG-PLA
micelles to improve the solubility of SMART-100. Due to the high logP
value (4.08) of SMART-100, its aqueous solubility is very low (below
the detection limit, 2 ng/ml). However, the use of PEG-PLA micelles
significantly increased its aqueous solubility. The maximum solubility
reached to 213.9 8.1 µg/ml, which increased SMART-100 solubility
by at least 1.1×105 folds (Fig. 5). Polymeric micelles are known to
enhance solubilization of hydrophobic compounds by accommodat-
ing them in their hydrophobic core of polymer. A critical parameters
involves in the solubilization process is polymer–drug compatibility,
which could be evaluated by solubility difference (Δ) and Flory–
Huggins interaction parameter (Xsp) [27]. We have calculated the
solubility parameters of SMART-100 and PLA hydrophobic core by
Molecular Modeling Pro Software (ChemSW Inc., Fairfield, CA). The
calculated parameters for PLA is 19.7 (δd), 2.48 (δp) and 20.9 (δh),
while those of SMART-100 is 20.3 (δd), 6.5 (δp) and 9.2 (δh). Thus, the
solubility difference (Δ) between PLA and SMART-100 is 12.4.
Typically, a solubility difference value less than 5 is needed to
observed good solubility [28]. Therefore, we plan to design and
modify the hydrophobic core of the polymer to make it more
compatible with SMART-100 and further increase the solubility of
SMART-100.
[16] H. Maeda, J. Wu, T. Sawa, Y. Matsumura, K. Hori, Tumor vascular permeability and the
EPR effect in macromolecular therapeutics: a review, J. Control Release 65 (1–2)
(2000) 271–284.
[17] T. Minko, P. Kopeckova, V. Pozharov, J. Kopecek, HPMA copolymer bound
adriamycin overcomes MDR1 gene encoded resistance in
a human ovarian
carcinoma cell line, J. Control Release 54 (2) (1998) 223–233.
[18] T.K. Bronich, P.A. Keifer, L.S. Shlyakhtenko, A.V. Kabanov, Polymer micelle with
cross-linked ionic core, J. Am. Chem. Soc 127 (23) (2005) 8236–8237.
[19] D.J. Booser, F.J. Esteva, E. Rivera, V. Valero, L. Esparza-Guerra, W. Priebe, G.N.
Hortobagyi, Phase II study of liposomal annamycin in the treatment of
doxorubicin-resistant breast cancer, Cancer Chemother. Pharmacol. 50 (1)
(2002) 6–8.
[20] X. Dong, C.A. Mattingly, M.T. Tseng, M.J. Cho, Y. Liu, V.R. Adams, R.J. Mumper,
Doxorubicin and paclitaxel-loaded lipid-based nanoparticles overcome multidrug
resistance by inhibiting P-glycoprotein and depleting ATP, Cancer Res. 69 (9)
(2009) 3918–3926.
[21] J.T. Hunt, Discovery of ixabepilone, Mol. Cancer Ther. 8 (2) (2009) 275–281.
[22] M. Takeda, A. Mizokami, K. Mamiya, Y.Q. Li, J. Zhang, E.T. Keller, M. Namiki, The
establishment of two paclitaxel-resistant prostate cancer cell lines and the
mechanisms of paclitaxel resistance with two cell lines, Prostate 67 (9) (2007)
955–967.
Acknowledgements
[23] Y. Liu, Y. Li, H. Wang, J. Yu, H. Lin, D. Xu, Y. Wang, A. Liang, X. Liang, X. Zhang, M. Fu,
H. Qian, C. Lin, BH3-based fusion artificial peptide induces apoptosis and targets
human colon cancer, Mol. Ther. 17 (9) (2009) 1509–1516.
[24] K. Muckova, J.S. Duffield, K.D. Held, J.V. Bonventre, A.M. Sheridan, cPLA2-
interacting protein, PLIP, causes apoptosis and decreases G1 phase in mesangial
cells, Am. J. Physiol. Renal. Physiol. 290 (1) (2006) F70–79.
This work is partially supported by the teaching assistantship from
the University of Tennessee School of Pharmacy to Feng Li, and Van
Vleet Endowed Chair to Duane D. Miller.
[25] T.H. Wang, H.S. Wang, Y.K. Soong, Paclitaxel-induced cell death: where the cell
cycle and apoptosis come together, Cancer 88 (11) (2000) 2619–2628.
[26] K.S. Lee, H.C. Chung, S.A. Im, Y.H. Park, C.S. Kim, S.B. Kim, S.Y. Rha, M.Y. Lee, J. Ro,
Multicenter phase II trial of Genexol-PM, a Cremophor-free, polymeric micelle
formulation of paclitaxel, in patients with metastatic breast cancer, Breast Cancer
Res. Treat. 108 (2) (2008) 241–250.
[27] P.J. Marsac, S.L. Shamblin, L.S. Taylor, Theoretical and practical approaches for
prediction of drug–polymer miscibility and solubility, Pharm. Res. 23 (10) (2006)
2417–2426.
References
[1] M.A. Jordan, L. Wilson, Microtubules as a target for anticancer drugs, Nat. Rev.
Cancer 4 (4) (2004) 253–265.
[2] E.K. Rowinsky, The development and clinical utility of the taxane class of
antimicrotubule chemotherapy agents, Annu. Rev. Med. 48 (1997) 353–374.
[3] M.A. Jordan, K. Kamath, How do microtubule-targeted drugs work? An overview,
Curr. Cancer Drug Targets 7 (8) (2007) 730–742.
[4] Q. Chu, M. Vincent, D. Logan, J.A. Mackay, W.K. Evans, Taxanes as first-line therapy
[28] J.P. Latere Dwan'Isa, L. Rouxhet, V. Preat, M.E. Brewster, A. Arien, Prediction of
drug solubility in amphiphilic di-block copolymer micelles: the role of polymer–
drug compatibility, Pharmazie 62 (7) (2007) 499–504.
for advanced non-small cell lung cancer:
guideline, Lung Cancer 50 (3) (2005) 355–374.
[5] A. Montero, F. Fossella, G. Hortobagyi, V. Valero, Docetaxel for treatment of solid
a systematic review and practice
tumours: a systematic review of clinical data, Lancet Oncol. 6 (4) (2005) 229–239.